Deseret News | Big boys suddenly chicken to play Y., U.

Reader comments
Big boys suddenly chicken to play Y., U.

Page:
1
2
Next >

Anonymous | 11:55 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

BYU should have a scheduling advantage over Utah. Our fan base is national. There will be blue-clad cougar boosters in the stands no matter where we play.

So...you're point. | 12:32 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

You said it already when you said this.

"There's a theme here: Big schools aren't obligated or inclined to play nonconference teams that actually might beat them. They can get to BCS bowls on the strength of their league play."

So what more is there? I'll tell you what the BYU, BSU, and Utah's of the college world needs to do......man up and play them at their HOME. Seriously though, I agree with the Big schools in a way. Why play these teams in SLC, Prova and Boise when not only do you have a chance of losing the game...but you also lose money...well, at least playing BSU does. I see Utah and BYU having the revenue in one game to pay the big boys...I don't think BSU does.

So for BSU especially, schedule those teams...and don't say they won't play you because they will if you just play them at their HOME. Heck, of all these...BSU is the most pathetic with their schedule. At least the MWC gives you a tougher league with 3 ranked teams.....Utah has been the best thus far, IMHO.

moose on the loose | 1:29 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Utah has a huge advantage over BYU in getting games with the big boys. You see, the big boys are still scared of BYU, but not of Utah. Kyle and his clan could get a 1 for 2 with any BCS school. While BYU demands a home and home, so the big boys say no thanks Tom. We will go with the 2-1 and a W and schedule Utah.

Comments continue below

Steve | 1:31 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Anonymous, I think you misunderstand the scheduling problem. Florida had its second-largest season opening crowd when they played Charleston Southern last month. The reason they don't schedule Utah or BYU is not because they're worried people won't come to the games. They do it because they don't want to lose to them. Opposing team fan bases are never the issue. They have enough fans that they can easily sell the extra tickets the visiting teams don't use.

We need a playoff | 2:10 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

As long as BCS schools can get huge paychecks from the BCS every year, they'll have no incentive to schedule tough non-BCS teams.

It's a triple-wammy Catch-22 situation for the best non-BCS teams.

First, they can't schedule BCS teams, especially home-and-home series with the best BCS teams.

Second, their records are downgraded because they "don't played anyone."

Third, the BCS conferences use "not-playing-anybody" as justification for not giving non-BCS teams equal access to the BCS bowls, to the lucrative BCS money train, and to having a real chance to compete for a national championship.

Then, the BCS conference teams use all of these negatives in their recruiting pitches to lure players away from the non-BCS schools.

The rich get richer and ensure that the poor never have a real opportunity to rise above the glass ceiling that the BCS conferences have established for the non-BCS conferences.

YEARS!!!! | 2:48 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

I have been saying this for years....BCS qualifiers will not play Non-BCS qualifiers because they have nothing to gain and everything to lose. My plan would be to schedule each conference against each other whether it be WAC vs Pac 10....MWC vs SEC..... then rotate it annually. It is only fair that ALL Div 1 teams should play each other one year or another.....Stop the BCS schools from dodging the non-BCS schools.

Re. Anonymous | 4:13 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

And BYU has a horrible record against top 25 teams in recent years. Scheduling BYU is less likely to be a guaranteed loss or a more difficult game for that BCS team!

BCS Reality... | 4:51 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Other than USC, the "giants" don't want to play teams like BYU, Utah, and Boise St. because they really do have A LOT tougher conference schedules. Playing in the MWC, BYU and Utah get division II level opponents throughout the season. USC is unique because they have an attitude that they can beat anyone, any time, any place. They always beat up on big-name non-conference opponents, despite losing to teams like Washington during conference play. BYU needs to take on this same attitude. Bronco Mendenhall said he wouldn't schedule one home game to two away games with BCS teams anymore. This is stupid because he is making the assumption that the MWC deserves the same respect as other big conferences. Sure, BYU and Utah might pull off an upset once a year, but their schedules are incredibly weak. Take the 2-for-1s and stop complaining about lack of respect! Losing a close game on the road to a formidable opponent is a lot better than beating up on the Eastern Washintons and Troy States at home. Face it--BYU and Utah aren't deserving of home and home games with BCS conference teams!

Brad Rock | 5:19 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

knows all about being chicken.

B(C)S | 5:40 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

While it is true to a degree that BCS schools are taking a risk scheduling non-conference games with BU, Utah, or Boise, there is one advantage for those who do: Under the current BCS system, when several teams finish with only one loss or if several finish undefeated, the poll voters and computer rankings usually look closely at strength of schedule to determine which teams with identical records deserve a spot in the NC game. A team which has played and defeated a ranked BYU, Utah, or Boise team will have a better strength of schedule than a team that plays Charleston Southern or Wofford. If you schedule a ranked team like BYU, and win, it enhances your rankings in comparison with other teams with weaker schedules, AND if you lose to a ranked team like BYU or Utah, you won't fall as far as you would if you were upset by an Appalachian State. There are risks, but there are also rewards.

re; anonymous | 6:07 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

You are right, BYU does have an advantage in scheduling but Holmoe is too incompetant to get the job done. Byu could schedule anyone they want with the national fanbase due to the religion factor, but choose not to. News to Holmoe- byu is not the national power that strikes fear in all that you think they are. They are a solid program, nothing more.

OHIOBYUFan | 6:09 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

It doesn't matter what (BYUs) fan base is, as the article points out, the BCS'ers WON'T sign up to play BYU for the reasons stated. It's the same for Utah basically. All I can say is good luck to the MWC (BYU particularly) in the future, and hope you can schedule BCS caliber schools.

Blah | 6:47 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Whatever dude. Just because there are LDS in other states doesn't mean they are by-who fans. Utah is by far the better team, especially for big games.

It does not matter | 6:50 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

who has the bigger fan base. Teams will not schedule BYU, Utah, Boise State, TCU or Fresno State because there is a chance of being beaten. They do not want to look pathetic. While good teams get better the best teams want to stay on top and not get beat up.

We will be a joke | 7:19 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

I agree with statements above, I do not like how Bronco said we will not go 2 for 1, 2 at their place and 1 at ours... Its like breaking our contract with ESPN because we dont want to play during the week, its stupid and a waste of time like the MTN. We need to take every 2 for 1 we can get, if we end up filling our schedule with cupcakes and even teams that bronco wants to play like Northwestern and Army we are done and will never get respect, I think that Bronco might be confused as he said we dont need to play big schools as we dont need amny more credability??? Apparently he doesnt have a TV or read any newspapers, are people talking about the OU win? or the FSU lost? We better figure this mess out, we already are in a hole with the worst network in the nation - the MTN, lets not become a complete joke.

S2 | 7:21 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Very difficult to prove collusion by the BCS defenders, I suspect. But collusion can certainly create and maintain an impregnable wall between the accepted upper tier, and those that deserve to be included, which affects recruiting, tv revenue, and ultimately shuts down or creates another, lower tier.

It all comes down to greed.

It believe that the idea of a national championship arrived at by playoffs, more games, intensified media focus and the like, feeds the same monster, though not one the BCS has their funnels connected to as yet, and until they do, are not going to accomodate playoffs.

I don't support the idea of exploiting student athletes to feed the greed machines by either mechanism, believing both to be detrimental to the game itself, and to those who are not part of the clique.

I like the old conference-centric focus with a limited and prestigious bowl season as a reward offering good cross-conference matchups. The fan and media would have plenty of fodder for fueling fun football arguments, discussions, articles, and columns through the post-season, maintaining college football zest and traditions.

Seems too those exciting x-conference matchups would return to liven up schedules.

Two things | 7:46 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Utah hasn't taken a 2-for-1 against anyone in years. It has taken 1-and-dones against Michigan (twice) and Notre Dame (in 2010) in the last 10 years. That's it.

Finally, I'm not so sure Utah applies to this scenario. Yes, scheduling is a challenge, but Utah recently inked Pittsburgh to a home-and-home. It has games against Iowa State, Washington State, Oregon and Colorado on the schedule in the next four years.

I'll agree that such a slate isn't exactly Murderer's Row, but I know BYU would take it in a second to replace what it currently has. Hopefully, BYU gets better non-conference opponents in the future.

Trueblue | 8:10 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

The whole BCS thing is going to get worse before it gets better. The Universitys with the realy good football programs know the formula to keep themselves in the national spotlight. Oklahoma paid dearly by scheduling BYU. Say what you will but OU has the Atheletes to beat anybody and without that season opening loss to BYU they could be undefeated and wranked #1 in the country. This is all about money. Sports are unpredictable. The best team/player dosn't always win. If you can scue the outcome by sand bagging and get away with it, the big boys figure "why not". The question is not wether the BCS automatic qualifiers have better teams, consistantly they do. If you are a BSU, BYU, Utah fan and don't realize this you are just being foolish. That is not the point. Everyone must have equal opertunity. That is the point. You can't just say you are better and have it be so. You must prove you are better each and every week out on the field. If you are indeed better it will show, and then you can say you earned what you got.

BYU basketball | 8:25 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Has the same problem. Everyone criticizes BYU's schedule, but they can't get any of the big name schools to play in Provo.

Anonymous | 8:29 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

See, here's where a playoff would be helpful...if you took every conference champion into a playoff, then out of conference scheduling would allow for a team to lose to a BYU or a Utah or BSU, because if they still win their conference, they're in the playoff...even if they lost 3 non-conference games. It eliminates the whole "the SEC doesn't have to schedule tough teams because their conference is so tough" malarky that we keep getting fed. Instead, it encourages them to schedule tougher mid-major teams like Tulsa, BYU, Utah, BSU, East Carolina, etc. to give them real tests to tune up for conference play.

The BCS has ruined college football.

8 and 4 | 8:31 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

every school should schedule 8 games of their own, and the remaining 4 be decided at large by a competition committee after the season is well underway... with 2 weeks notice of the set of possible opponents for their upcoming games so they can prepare. Only a path of this nature will ever mix it up so the big boys end up playing big-boy schools and the up and comers get a shot at them as well.

USU Fan | 8:43 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

You guys in the MWC sound like a bunch of whiners!! It's no wonder the BCS doesn't want you to join. How are you guys going to fee when the WAC becomes the next BCS Conference? Talks are already under way.

See, we have an athletic director who actually does something. Have fun watching our games on ESPN. I would watch your games but I don't get the Mountain or Versus. lol!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SoCalTrueBlue | 8:47 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

BYU should offer to schedule 2 games in Provo to 3 games away with a big name BCS school. Otherwise we will be inviting Northern Iowa back to Provo.

Florida State | 8:52 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

I can think of one big name school that certainly is not scared of coming to Provo.....

Anonymous | 8:53 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Gotta laugh at this conversation. Remember last year when Utah State was being criticized for playing a weak OOC schedule in Basketball and Stew used the same argument the Utes are using now? Nobody wants to play USU, especially in the Spectrum... Why? They are really good and you might lose to a team that everyone expects you to beat.

How did you Ute fans respond?

You didn't accept the argument, but now you expect everybody to understand when you use the same argument to defend your scheduling in football.

Isn't it great? Perhaps we are all in the same boat after all.

You tell me | 9:00 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

So what is the difference between the "Big Schools"(BCS) and the schedule Boise St. puts together. No difference in my eyes

Times have changed | 9:05 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Utah beats Alabama; BYU beats Oklahoma. Both schools are on the rise (Utah has peaked, actually) and BCS powerhouse schools are smart enough to recognize they have HUGE risk by playing either school.

The bottom line is the BCS has ruined college football.

USU Fan | 9:09 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Please no one comment to that post, it is posted by a 14 yr old boy who has forgotten that USU is the worst team in College Football along with the entire WAC...

To USU Fan | 9:15 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

I was excited about USU football and what Gary Anderson is doing this year in Logan. As Cougar faithful I can root for USU as long as they are not playing BYU. Utah I cannot root for. You have just proven that you too can show a huge lack of class like your red brothers to the south. That is too bad.
The best thing that could happen would be for BSU, Utah and BYU along with a few others to start a new conference based on getting into the BCS. It would not be that difficult. The problem is... that would leave you out and I would hate to see that. The country needs to go back to the original bowl system. It was more fun but probably sold far fewer newspapers.

Dutchman | 9:27 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

No one has mentioned the MWC TV deal. The TV deal is really hurting scheduling home and home with big name schools because their fans expect to see their team on TV when they play in Salt Lake or Provo. Can't see your team on TV if you have no access to the Mtn Channel and TV is controlled by the home team TV contract. So the big boys are now refusing home and home with MWC teams. Utah has to settle for one and done arrangements. I don't know the answer because we can't go back to ESPN and play games on Tuesday and Wednesday nights with only one game on TV. Also, I believe there is a religious bias against some teams not scheduling BYU. They won't say it directly but some elitists simply won't play a Mormon school.

Scheduling... | 9:30 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

As the article, and several others have pointed out, the Name of the MWC team does not matter, TCU, BYU, Utah or even BSU...the fact is that the BCS conferences know they don't have to play MWC schools. It's in their best interest to play weak teams because they know their goal is to get to the Top 20 in the nation for a big payout bowl.

That being said, we should be able to schedule the middle-tier BCS conf.

UteFan | 9:31 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Not true. The big boys are playing byu and killing them. Florida st had no problem destroying a weak byu team. Utah is the one having a hard time getting top teams to play them. We kill teams like Michigan, Alabama. Oregon got lucky. byu is having a hard time because they want to play weak teams like Tulane. Even a terrible Washington doesn't want to play byu. so sad.

No to Wednesday | 9:40 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

For the time being, the MWC teams are just going to have to live with the television coverage they have. Small tweaks here and there could help improve it a little, but nothing major is going to happen until a rival to ESPN is created (which is in the works).

ESPN controls college football broadcasting today and has decreed that the non-BCS conferences will play late night games on Tuesdays and Wednesdays and maybe a few Thursdays. The early Thursday slots and all Saturday slots are reserved for the "big boys". The WAC need not apply. And the MWC would be in the same boat if ESPN controlled the MWC's football coverage.

Even then, most of the "small fries" games that ESPN covers are pushed off to ESPN-U or are included in a PPV game that only fans who subscribe to the game can watch.

Disagree with the theory | 9:45 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

BSU is ranked 5th in the BCS. TCU is 8th. BYU is still top 16 with Utah at 18.

Who has TCU played? If they win out, they will get a BCS birth. BSU has played Oregon and that's it!

If I am BYU, Utah, TCU and BSU, I wouldn't worry about playing the big boys. TCU has proven you can get top 8 with playing nobody. BSU has a shot at a national title playing nobody other than Oregon.

Who did Utah beat the season they played Alabama? BYU and TCU.

Nuff said. No need to schedule big sissy's!

Take out an add in MiamiHerald | 9:47 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

What one of these teams needs to do is take out a full page add in the paper of any chosen Big Schools home towns and have published a 1 for 1 offer to play. Make it clear that if they the Big School dose not play they are showing they are scared. Pull back the curtain on the big bad Wizard of Oz.

wallofvooodoo | 9:49 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

They won't play becuase they are afraid someone will point out the emperor's new clothes.

Cynic | 10:09 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

RE:Blah

You need to get out of the (center of the universe) Salt Lake Valley once in awhile. Most LDS football fans outside the state of Utah (even inside for that matter) are BYU fans. The U dominates the Salt Lake Valley, but no where else. Get used to it.

Anonymous | 10:24 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

I don't think the Utes are complaining about BCS schools not scheduling them. At least for the next four years. Of 16 non-conference games over the next four years, 10 of them are against competition from a BCS conference. 3 of them are against Boise State, which is the best non-BCS conference team they could schedule out of their conference and better than most BCS conference teams. They have 1 against San Jose State--that is there only real "gimme" game and even that is with a WAC team that has good speed and athletecism, it's not a FCS team like Northern Iowa. The remaining two are against Utah State, and that is resuming the battle of the brothers in-state rivalry. I can't imagine BCS teams are more afraid of BYU than Utah, since Utah has the best record of all non-BCS teams vs. BCS competition.

Jacob612 | 10:27 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

In my humble opinion, the MWC needs to heavily recruit BSU. If the MWC had 4 consistently ranked teams, the respect would come. Just like on Saturday in Provo. Nobody can doubt that this showdown is going to be big, thus the ESPN thing. If the MWC had 4 such teams instead of 3 (half the conference), with the help of the inconsistent Air Force, they would have to look this way.

As a side note, it would be outstanding if USU could pull their heads out and make a great program. I have hopes Gary A. will make some good things happen up there. The MWC should dump SDSU and WY or UNLV and recruit BSU and USU if they can pull their heads out. It would be sweet to have a legit 3 way rivalry in Utah.

Zonie | 10:37 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Money created much of this problem, and money may provide a partial solution. I think we will see a lot more match ups like the BYU-OK game in Dallas. The people who run the pro stadiums are seeing the potential of arranging blockbuster games in their stadiums, and they have the cash to make it happen. Boise plays Virginia Tech early next year at FedEx Stadium in DC.

There will be more of this as more NFL teams recognize the revenue potential.

Meanwhile, the MWC really needs to invite Boise State to join. That will make it much easier for the BCS to add a seventh AQ conference.

Anonymous | 10:43 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Add Boise State to the Mountain West Conference!!!!!

Dover Pro | 10:43 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

I look at this a little different. BYU and Utah really have weaklings they play as well. Most of the teams in the Mountain West are cream puffs that look good on paper but when they play BCS schools generally BYU and Utah do not do so well. I realize that the Mt. West is a weak conference so why are we so concerned about who they play in pre season when the teams in conference are just as weak. If BYU and Utah played in a really good conference they would have one to three losses each year. It is not that other schools do not want to play them because the Mountain West schools also play easy wins in pre season. How about Tulane?

boise state | 10:45 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

owns Utah football and bywho?

the MWC-also $ driven! | 10:46 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

I think when teams started playing the Hawaii card-strength of schedule 117-and still getting the big pay day for the school and the conf. it helped create some of the mess. When all these non-BCS schools are only interested in going undefeated and playing the worst teams in the country like Boise is doing, you have a problem. Why would a team with a stadium that seats even 60,000 go to Boise and play in front of 32,000 (the Oregon game this year). I find it interesting that Fresno in the coming years plays Mississippi 3 times, Nebraska 3 times, Colorado 3 times, Ill., and Cinn. The reason is Freson plays 2 games away to get 1 home game or plays AWAY games and they, with Utah, Houston, TCU, and ByU (especially this year in adding a sure L with OKL) that is not consumed with scheduling to go undefeated. If this entire mess was not driven by MONEY why wouldn't the MWC add Boise and Fresno to get to 5 very good teams. Because that would be more difficult games and they wouldn't go undefeated, to the BCS, and BIG MONEY!!!!!!

citizen16 | 10:48 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

The Mtn TV deal hurts scheduling in many ways too. As I understand it, ESPN used to help broker some of the games that BYU was able to schedule in the past. ESPN also played a big part in putting the BYU-Oklahoma game together.

But now that the MWC games aren't on ESPN, they're not going to help convince someone to play BYU or Utah in a home-and-home. And when a BCS team does play at a MWC school, it's going to be hard to find the game on TV if you can find it at all.

I don't follow Utah football, but it's great that they have several BCS schools on their upcoming schedule. My guess is that most of those deals were put into place before Utah embarrassed Alabama on national television. Some of those teams may chicken out before the games are played. And Utah's AD is probably having his own challenges getting BCS schools to agree now to play Utah. Those schools don't want to lose to a non-BCS team or play a game that won't be on TV.

Re: UteFan... | 11:14 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Time go go back to flippin burgers, your 15 min break is up. "Can I get an oreo shake to go?"

Disagree with Disagree | 11:33 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

If you don't schedule big teams you have to run the table to get a BCS bid.

If BYU had only barely lost to FSU and FSU had turned out to be good, there would still be a chance they could have qualified for the BCS based on the fact that they beat Oklahoma (although Oklahoma doesn't look as good as their ranking... and I'm not going to do the Bradford debate - otherwise I'll just argue that had he been in the second half they may have made the adjustments to put them on top).

Yeah BYU, Utah, and TCU have stronger schedules than BSU but they still have to run the table to qualify. Until we get an automatic bid or... they fix the system, that's how it's going to be.

From the Big boys | 11:38 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Hi I'm a big boy. My conference buddies and I don't want to play you guys because we have nothing to gain. We have an automatic bid for the BCS. We don't even have to be better than everybody else, we just have to win the conference. Also, we don't want to risk getting embarrassed.

I'm going to let you in on a little secret... my buddies and I schedule very weak out of conference opponents so that we can pad our win column and get good rankings. Then the only other teams we play are each other. This helps with the illusion that we are big boys and hides the fact that our conference may not be as good as everybody else thinks. If we have a couple of tough battles between us, it makes us look good. And as long as we don't play teams from other conferences, we won't be exposed. I've got to go now and cash my checks from all the sweet deals we get.

Kyle | 11:40 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

You could be Oregon, beating Utah boosted their season and gave them a strong win. Are you saying Oregon hasn't gained from it's win?

re: from the big boys | 11:40 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Totally true. How do we know that these conferences are really any good? Until they step out of their leagues and try on some of the better teams from the other leagues (i.e. not Wyoming) the only time we can find out is in a BCS game (which they've tried to make as difficult as possible for us to get into).

Page:
1
2
Next >

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.